The Psalms are the word of Christ

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Lee said most of the text [of the Psalms] was simply the word of David, where I suspect that much more of the text is actually the word of Christ. I think we differ greatly in how much Christ was revealed in the text.

I have already written, here and elsewhere, about how Lee dismisses David's rescue from Gath in Psalm 34 as engineered by human craftiness rather than divine intervention. The Psalm title's claim that "God rescued him" was disparaged by Lee.

I would like to continue, here, with Psalm 35. I am unwilling/unable to do a thorough systematic review of the Psalms footnotes, but hope that these few samples will make a point.

The 28 verses of Psalm 35 get one comment, in the first verse. David asks God, "Fight, O LORD, with those who fight against me." Here is the footnote:

"In the New Testament economy, a spiritual person would never ask God to fight against his enemies as David asks in this psalm."

So why did Jesus tell the parable of the unrighteous judge in Luke 18? "Avenge me of my enemies", the widow repeatedly asks the judge. Who are her adversaries? "We fight not against flesh and blood but against spiritual forces of darkness", writes Paul.

John wrote, "There was war in heaven, Michael and his angels against the devil and his angels". Don't you think there is some spiritual warfare going on? Why does Lee pretend it doesn't exist in the Psalms? When Jesus showed up, the demons cried out in fear. "What do you have to do with us, Jesus, Nazarene! Have you come to destroy us before our time?!?"

Jesus said, "When you go out to battle with ten thousand troops, be careful if you run into someone coming against you with twenty thousand. Better not fight with them at that point." (cf. Luke 14). Was Jesus failing Lee's New Testament economy in Luke 14? Or was Jesus referring to a spiritual struggle, using images (i.e. parables)? When faced with the type or shadow of this warfare, par excellence, of David's fight(s) in the book of Psalms, Lee pointedly ignores this option.

So my question is, how can a book so deficient in explanation be held up by anyone as the, or even a, definitive exposition of the Bible? I can only surmise, as one of the posters has previously done earlier, that Lee was so tapped out by his exhaustive work in the NT that he simply had no gas left in the tank to give the Psalms (among other works) the careful study it deserved. So he just blew off chapter after chapter with a perfunctory wave of the hand: "Not according to the NT economy". And his captive (pun quite intended) audience was forced to take the "definitive Biblical exposition" from this "rich ministry". Child, please.